1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to computer peripherals, and in particular to a personal key having input and output devices integrated therewith to provide for increased security.
2. Description of the Related Art
In the last decade, the use of personal computers in both the home and in the office have become widespread. These computers provide a high level of functionality to many people at a moderate price, substantially surpassing the performance of the large mainframe computers of only a few decades ago. The trend is further evidenced by the increasing popularity of laptop and notebook computers, which provide high-performance computing power on a mobile basis.
The widespread availability of personal computers has had a profound impact on interpersonal communications as well. Only a decade ago, telephones or fax machines offered virtually the only media for rapid business communications. Today, a growing number of businesses and individuals communicate via electronic mail (e-mail). Personal computers have also been instrumental in the emergence of the Internet and its growing use as a medium of commerce.
While certainly beneficial, the growing use of computers in personal communications, commerce, and business has also given rise to a number of unique challenges.
First, the growing use of computers has resulted in extensive unauthorized use and copying of computer software, costing software developers substantial revenue. Although unauthorized copying or use of software is a violation of the law, the widespread availability of pirated software and enforcement difficulties have limited the effectiveness of this means of preventing software piracy.
Software developers and computer designers alike have sought technical solutions to attack the problem of software piracy. One solution uses an external device known as a hardware key, or “dongle” coupled to an input/output (I/O) port of the host computer.
While the use of such hardware keys is an effective way to reduce software piracy, to date, their use has been substantially limited to high value software products. Hardware keys have not been widely applied to popular software packages, in part, because the hardware keys are too expensive, and in part, because there is a reluctance on the part of the application program user to bother with a hardware key whenever use of the protected program is desired. Also, in many cases, the hardware keys are designed for use with only one application. Hence, where the use of multiple applications on the same computer is desired, multiple hardware keys must be operated at the same time.
While it reflects a tremendous advance over telephones and facsimile machines, e-mail also has its problems. One of these problems involves security. Telephone lines are relatively secure and a legally sanctioned way to engage in the private transmission of information, however, e-mails are generally sent over the Internet with no security whatsoever. Persons transmitting electronic messages must be assured that their messages are not opened or disclosed to unauthorized persons. Further, the addressee of the electronic message should be certain of the identity of the sender and that the message was not tampered with at some point during transmission.
Although the packet-switching nature of Internet communications helps to minimize the risk of intercepted communications, it would not be difficult for a determined interloper to obtain access to an unprotected e-mail message.
Many methods have been developed to secure the integrity of electronic messages during transmission. Simple encryption is the most common method of securing data. Both secret key encryption such as DES (Data Encryption Standard) and public key encryption methods that use both a public and a private key are implemented. Public and private key encryption methods allow users to send Internet and e-mail messages without concern that the message will be read by unauthorized persons or that its contents will be tampered with. However, key cryptographic methods do not protect the receiver of the message, because they do not allow the recipient to authenticate the validity of the public key or to validate the identity of the sender of the electronic message.
The use of digital certificates presents one solution to this problem. A digital certificate is a signed document attesting to the identity and public key of the person signing the message. Digital certificates allow the recipient to validate the authenticity of a public key. However, the typical user may use e-mail to communicate with hundreds of persons, and may use any one of several computers to do so. Hence, a means for managing a number of digital certificates across several computer platforms is needed.
Internet commerce raises other challenges. Users seeking to purchase goods or services using the Internet must be assured that their credit card numbers and the like are safe from compromise. At the same time, vendors must be assured that services and goods are delivered only to those who have paid for them. In many cases, these goals are accomplished with the use of passwords. However, as Internet commerce becomes more commonplace, customers are finding themselves in a position where they must either decide to use a small number of passwords for all transactions, or face the daunting task of remembering multiple passwords. Using a small number of passwords for all transactions inherently compromises security, since the disclosure of any of the passwords may lead to a disclosure of the others. Even the use of a large number of passwords can lead to compromised security. Because customers commonly forget their password, many Internet vendors provide an option whereby the user can be reminded of their password by providing other personal information such as their birthplace, mother's maiden name, and/or social security number. This feature, while often necessary to promote Internet commerce, severely compromises the password by relying on “secret” information that is in fact, publicly available.
Even in cases where the user is willing and able to keep track of a large number of passwords, the password security technique is often compromised by the fact that the user is inclined to select a password that is relatively easy to remember. It is indeed rare that a user selects a truly random password. What is needed is a means for generating and managing random passwords that can be stored and recalled for use on a wide variety of computer platforms.
Internet communications have also seen the increased use of “cookies.” Cookies comprise data and programs that keep track of a user's patterns and preferences that can be downloaded from the Internet server for storage on the user's computer. Typically, cookies contain a range of addresses. When the browser encounters those addresses again, the cookies associated with the addresses are provided to the Internet server. For example, if a user's password were stored as a cookie, the use of the cookie would allow the user to request services or goods without requiring that the user enter the password again when accessing that service for the second and subsequent time.
However beneficial, cookies can also have their dark side. Many users object to storage of cookies on their computer's hard drive. In response to these concerns, Internet browser software allows the user to select an option so that they are notified before cookies are stored or used. The trouble with this solution is that this usually results in an excessive number of messages prompting the user to accept cookies. A better solution than this all-or-nothing approach would be to allow the storage and/or use of cookies, but to isolate and control that storage and use to comply with user-specified criteria.
Smartcards provide some of the above mentioned functionality, but smartcards do not present an ideal solution. First, personal keys are only valuable to the user if they offer a single, widely accepted secure repository for digital certificates and passwords. Smartcard readers are relatively expensive, and are not in wide use, at least in the United States, and are therefore unsuited to the task.
Second, smartcards do not provide for entering data directly into the card. This opens the smartcard to possible sniffer modules in malicious software, which can monitor the smartcard-reader interface to determine the user's personal identification or password information. This problem is especially problematic in situations where the user is using an unknown or untrusted smartcard reader. The lack of any direct input device also prevents the user from performing any smartcard-related functions in the relatively common situation where no smartcard reader is available.
Third, data cannot be accessed from the smartcard unless the smartcard is in the reader. This prevents the user from viewing data stored in the smartcard (i.e. a stored password) until a smartcard reader can be located. Given that smartcard readers (especially trusted ones) can be difficult to find, this substantially limits the usefulness of the card. Of course, the user may simply write the password down on paper, but this may compromise the security of all of the data in the card, and is inconsistent with the goal of providing a central, secure, portable repository for private data.
From the foregoing, it can be seen that there is a need for a personal key that allows the user to store and retrieve passwords and digital certificates without requiring the use of vulnerable external interfaces.